Return-Path: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bluetooth, bpf: split sk_filter in l2cap_sock_recv_cb From: Marcel Holtmann In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 13:35:41 +0200 Cc: Willem de Bruijn , "open list:BLUETOOTH DRIVERS" , Daniel Borkmann , Gustavo Padovan , Alexei Starovoitov Message-Id: References: <20160726000523.11189-1-mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com> To: Mat Martineau Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Mat, >>> I modified the original patch to call sk_filter for ERTM before the packet is >>> handled by the state machine and to not set the filter locked flag. I tested >>> using l2test in ERTM mode, with and without a "randomly drop 1 in 64 packets" >>> filter attached. >> >> Thanks for testing. For consistency's sake, is it preferable to filter >> at this point for all modes? > > Only ERTM and streaming mode end up on this code path, and I think there's a benefit to handling these two modes similarly. There are a number of other paths to l2cap_sock_recv_cb(), and there isn't one perfect place to call sk_filter for all modes. would code restructuring help to create a better place to put sk_filter? >>> >>> --- >>> net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c | 4 ++++ >>> net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c | 13 +++++++++++-- >>> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c >>> index 54ceb1f..d5de0ce 100644 >>> --- a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c >>> +++ b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c >>> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ >>> >>> #include >>> #include >>> +#include >>> >>> #include >>> #include >>> @@ -6610,6 +6611,9 @@ static int l2cap_data_rcv(struct l2cap_chan *chan, struct sk_buff *skb) >>> goto drop; >>> } >>> >>> + if (chan->mode == L2CAP_MODE_ERTM && sk_filter(chan->data, skb)) >>> + goto drop; >>> + >> >> sk_filter can also accept, but trim, packets. If the protocol expects >> a header that it unconditionally pulls later, use sk_filter_trim to > > sk_filter_trim_cap? I see that you added that recently. It's not in bluetooth-next and we're aiming for a patch that can be easily backported to stable. Lets create a version that fixes this first. One version that we can backport into stable. And then we can start utilizing newer infrastructure available in Linus' tree. Regards Marcel